Behind the Veil of Turkey’s “Zero Problem” Policy

KurdishMedia.com - By Ardishir Rashidi Kalhur

13/09/2012 00:00:00

A Kurdish Perspective for Kurdish American Education Society

Ardishir Rashidi Kalhur

“Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it”. We humans often learn from the devastating effects of natural disasters and come back to rebuild stronger, so we may be better prepared to survive in the wake of the next disaster. So it is natural for peoples and cultures to learn from previous events, and to fight back against recurring forces in history in which societies have been invaded and the survival of peoples and their culture have been threatened. To write about history is not an easy task, as there are always multiple points of view that may be represented. The intention in writing this article is to shed light on the events in history in the lands and societies that existed and pre-date the present day country of Turkey (previously known by former names as the Ottoman Empire, Byzantine, part of the Greek, Roman, Medes and Persian Empires, and various collected states as they existed in Biblical times). The former citizens of theses predecessor states became the present day citizens of Turkey under General Ataturk less than one hundred years ago, and their former cultural identities have become mostly erased or hidden from them, so much so that most people who today call themselves Turks are without awareness of their own history. In a spirit of helping the world to better understand the current events taking place in the Middle East from the perspective of a continuation of past historical events in this region of the world, and Turkey’s role in them, this article is presented to help educate and perhaps look for lessons to learn from and find solutions to the existing problems associated with the government of Turkey.

Turkey’s internal conflict with the Kurdish people as well as the Jewish people and other minorities stems from the centuries old policy of “Turkification” [1] that has imposed a real, imminent and serious threat on their cultural and physical survival. Turkification has been an intentional political policy since Ataturk to erase pre-existing cultural identities and languages. The PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party) is just the tip of the iceberg in the resistance against this invasive force with its political intent to “Turkify” Kurdistan and the lands of Bible (Hittites, Medes, Elimites, etc.). Turkey’s “deep state” policies of linguistic and cultural “Turkification”, is just one example of the deep root-cause of the ongoing conflict between the Kurds and the Turks, manifesting itself in a violent confrontation that has been labeled by the Kurds as the “Turkish Horrorism” and by the Turks as the “PKK Terrorism”.

The now famous “Zero Problem” policy of the Turkish government credited to Foreign Minister Mr. Ahmet Davutglu [2], is viewed as a veil or smokescreen for pursuing their ultimate “Turkification” policies of the peoples and cultures internally’ and in their immediate neighborhood and beyond; rather than a genuine attempt to solve the current and historical problems associated with Turkey’s “deep state” policies. In essence, this ostensibly “Zero Problem” political doctrine of the Neo-Ottoman leadership, is a misleading cover for their core “deep state” ambitious agenda which can be summarized to achieve the following three part political objective:

1) Denial of history and the gross misdeeds committed by the Turkic invasion from the East, and the old Ottomans, and continuation of their Turkification policies of non-Turkic people to this day.

2) Concealment of the wishful thinking of the Neo-Ottomans to recapture the lost territories of the old Ottoman Empire, this time with an eye on Europe, by becoming a member of the European Union.

3) Help expedite paving of the New Silk Road, and mobilizing of millions of Turkic origin people to migrate westward, out of China to Turkey as the East-West “bridge” to enter Europe and beyond.

The regional or global success or failure of Turkey’s “deep state” agenda under the Neo-Ottoman leadership manifested under the doctrine of the “Zero Problem” policy deserves a review from a historical and current perspective and is the subject of this article by the Kurdish American Education Society.

Part I:

Denial of Past Deeds and Turkey’s Internal “Zero Problem” policy:

1.1 Ottoman Empire unlike no other Empire in History:

Unlike other great empires in history that were risen from a deep rooted culture and from a given place of civilization, expanding outward first, then declining inward to their places of origin, the Turkish Ottoman Empire has never had a place of originality and cultural belonging rooted in its current place of occupancy known as Turkey. The Roman Empire retracted back to Rome, the Russian Empire retracted back to Moscow, the British Empire retracted back to London, and so was true about other empires in history. However, as it will be explained, the Turkish Empire never had a deep rooted place of cultural and historical belonging in the country known as Turkey. Therefore, the Ottoman Empire has been an “Empire in the Wind” and unlike other great empires in history that retracted to their place of origin, Turkey’s lack of originality and its capricious and disingenuous policies at internal, regional and global levels are likely to cause its further collapse to the point of endangering its future survival as a Nation State.

1.1.1 The origin of the Turkic people:

History books trace back the migrating origin of the Turkic people back to The Nomadic Tribes from the East, most specifically coming from the North Western region of China known as the Xinjiang and the Altaic Mountains in Mongolia. Along with other invading tribes and sub-tribes from the East, like Attila the Hun (5th c. AD), Ghaznavian (10th c. AD), the Seljuks (11th c. AD), Genghis Khan and Sons, as the Mongol Horde and the Ilkhanate (13th c. AD), the Tatars, who were recruited and brought to Russia by the Moguls from the Gobi Desert, and Tamerlane (14th c.AD), are collectively known as the Eastern Invaders. As far as the history of Kurdistan and root-cause conflict between the Kurds and the modern state of Turkey is concerned, history of three tribes are of prime importance, The Seljuk Tribe, the Oghuz tribe and The Genghis Khan & Sons, with the Oghuz tribe under Osman I, recognized as the ancestors of the Ottoman Turks and their descendants the current elite ruling class in Turkey, self-labeled as the Neo-Ottomans.

1.1.2 The Turks vs. the Turkified People:

History does not judge favorably the savagery and the ruthlessness by which the Turkic people invaded Iran, Kurdistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan and the entire Middle East and Eastern Europe. Their primary political objective went beyond raiding, looting and destruction of life and properties. To those who were fortunate enough to escape the scourge, their ultimatum was “Turkify or die” followed with extreme horrors that has left behind a trail of tears and torment ever since in the lands and cultures they conquered as they marched toward the West. Among their primary victims were the entire people and culture of Azerbaijan, who under the Ghaznavian, the Seljuks and Genghis Khan and sons, particularly his younger son Tolui and his grandson Hulagu and the Ilkhans, the Turkification of Azerbaijan was completed, so that it now is a fully Turkic speaking country, and the previous language and culture of Azerbaijan is now essentially extinct (Azerbaijan was a part of the greater Kingdom of Medes, and spoke Azeri, a Medic language related to the Kurdish language spoken in Kurdistan of Turkey, whereas Turkish language is non-Indo-European, Altaic most closely related to Mongolian). This assimilation was accomplished by the same force and fear of imposition and implementation of the Turkification process that is still employed by the government of Turkey against the Kurds.

Similarly, other regions in Iran and Kurdistan fell under these Turkish tribes with an overt and covert Turkification process continuing to this date. These include the Qashqai tribe in southern Iran, and Sunghur, Tuiserkan, Kulyaee, sagiz and Hamadan, Mandali, Kerkuk areas in Iraqi Kurdistan and needless to say also include the Kurds of Northern Kurdistan within Turkey, a major reason for the fight they are putting up against Turkey’s Turkification policy there.

In addition to the ongoing fight with the Kurds, the evidence for this longstanding Turkification and Turkic domination over pre-existing cultures include the now recognized genocide of the Armenians, and the many horrors committed in the Turkification process by the Ottoman Turks during the wars against the Anatolian peoples, as well as in the Balkans against the Bulgarians, the Serbian, Bosnians, Macedonians and the Greeks, involving general wholesale killing of the non-Turkic populations in their path to conquer Eastern Europe is well documented in history, much of which was brought to light again in the recent Bosnian-Serbian conflict, as well as the 1974 invasion of Cypress, which Turkey continues to occupy.

This long term pre-meditated plan to invade, pillage, kill and Turkify has long been in practice by the Old-Ottomans for the last thousand years in the Middle East and for the last six centuries in Europe and is being continued since the empowerment of Kamal Ataturk in 1923 and the creation of the nation-state known as Turkey.

1.2 Turkey’s Internal “Zero Problem” policies:

The “Zero Problem” if its intention is genuine, could be first implemented in Turkey’s internal policy in regards to solving the Kurdish problem, since it is obviously not a “Zero Problem”. This internal problem as well as problems with Turkey’s neighbors, stems from the deep-seated memories of genocide and other policies continuing today which are rooted in history with the patterns of violent behavior which Turkey and its Neo-Ottoman leadership wants to deny. The Turkified populations of Anatolia, Azerbaijan and the above mentioned places in Iran and Kurdistan have been kept in the dark about their non-Turkish identity. Turkish propaganda has been to simply make people believe that groups like the PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party), or the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA) and Greek continuation of their war of liberation for their occupied lands and historical landmarks, are just simply the work of some crazy terrorists who want to kill people for no apparent reason. This label of terrorism used by the Turkish nationalists cannot be further from the truth. Indeed any killing is an act of terrorism, and must be condemned in the strongest terms at all times. The Turkish government must also be held accountable for acts of genocide and horrorism committed against the non-Turks and against the Kurdish people in that country. To this very day, defenseless civilians, the mayors of the Kurdish cities, the intellects, the elected parliamentarians and everyone who resists the Turkish policies of Turkification can be subject to arrest and imprisonment and be labeled as a terrorist.

Part II

Neo-Ottoman wishful thinking to recapture the lost territories, with eye on EU membership.

2.1 Turkey’s desperation for a reason to go to war

While Turkey labels the Kurdish fight for political rights to self-govern and protect their rights as an act of terrorism, the Neo-Ottoman opportunists ironically are instigating the overthrow of neighboring regimes of Syria and those in the Arab Spring movement in the name of defending and supporting their rights to self-govern and obtain democratic rights for their people. This is of course with one caveat, that the Kurds in Syria must be excluded from this war of liberation and democratic rights. According to Turkey, the Kurds in Syria must be linked to PKK in order to justify their pursuit with guns, helicopters and the full power of the Turkish military establishment. If that doesn’t work, possibly use of chemical weapons against the Kurdish civilians, Saddam-style, to then be blamed on Assad’s regime may be another of their tactics to justify Turkish military invasion of Syria as the first step in the process of recapturing a part of the old Ottoman territories.

If this Turkish plan is too Machiavellian, not authorized by the United States and Europe with the backing of NATO, perhaps the Neo-Ottomans can use the Turkish right to protect the tomb of ‘Sulaiman Shah” the grandfather of the founder of the Ottoman Empire, Osman I, as the pretext to invade Syria. This plan too, bemusing as it may be, has received a No answer, particularly from France who has had a 1921 agreement with the then Ottoman government [3]. However, the agreement of 1921 was not with the government of Turkey founded in 1923, but with the abolished and defunct government of the Ottomans. As a further note, to rebut this reasoning, since the tomb has been once relocated due to creation of the Lake Assad in 1974, it makes perfect sense to be relocated once more to Turkey, than be the cause for a catastrophic war.

If the above options fail to give opportunity to invade and recapture Syria for the Neo-Ottomans, Turkey’s third option is to rethink its options by mending relations with Israel, seeking also the financial and political backing of Saudi Arabia and the State of Qatar, the global Sunni Islamic Jihadists to obtain the full support of the Gulf Cooperation Council to invade Syria. This plan however well within the ancient Turkic tribal tradition and mindset to invade, is well exposed and has faced a severe response from Iran, Syria, Iraq and Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shiite camp, including majority of people in Turkey on one hand, and by the veto power of Russia and the Chinese as the old and new global Super Powers at the United Nations on the other hand. At the moment, Turkey is left with no options to pursue and fulfill its Neo-Ottoman expansion policies which are hidden under the mask of the “Zero Problem” doctrine of Turkish leadership. Thus, this approach of the Neo-Ottomans Plan is defeated, as well as their first defeat with the rejection of Turkey’s bid for membership in the European Union.

2.2 Rejection of Turkey to Enter the European Union

The reason behind the refusal of the European Union to admit Turkey as an amicable member of the European Union is not the Islamophobia or xenophobia that Turkey is propagating among its own people and in the Islamic world. But again, one needs to lift the veil of the “Zero Problem” policy doctrine of Turkey, and see the hidden face of Turkey’s “deep State” geopolitical imagination [3].

Turkey’s lack of deep rooted cultural belonging in their present place of occupation has created a country with a Sybil-like personality and three delusional identities none of which is based in genuineness, but rather borrowed masks to suit the occasion, or purpose of the moment. These split identities can be seen as follows:

Identity I: Turkey is a Turkic Country with Far Eastern origin:

Identity II: Turkey is an Islamic Country

Identity III: Turkey is a European County

2.2.1 On the Turkic identity of Turkey, as recently as the gathering of the Cooperation Council of Turkic Speaking States (CCTS) on August 23, 2012, in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan that included Turkey, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, quoted from Sunday’s Zaman [4], “Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu stated at a pre-summit gathering of ministers in Bishkek, Turkic-speaking states should come closer for economic cooperation through transportation and energy projects “ as without it there can be no working arrangement throughout Eurasia.”

“When the four countries unite their forces, this will both pave the way for big projects that will bring welfare and peace to Eurasia and lead other countries [to cooperate],” he said on Wednesday, end of quote. By this, one can conclude that Turkey is undeniably still a Turkic country and a part of the Turkic speaking world which he would like to mobilize in Central Asia and without whose cooperation “there can be no working arrangement throughout Eurasia.” It is reasonable to also assume that the Turkish leadership in Turkey can count on mobilization of over 150 million Turkic Speaking peoples world-wide to respond to the Turkish call for political support in their quest to expand their Neo-Ottoman policies under the mask of “Zero Problem” doctrine, and their bid to enter EU as a member. As stated in reference [2] “the potential for a Turkic world stretching from the Adriatic to the Great Wall of China” could be what Mr. Ahmet Davutoglu, the Minister of Foreign Affairs is referring to in his gathering of the Cooperation Council of Turkic Speaking States (CCTS). To achieve this goal, Kurdistan, Armenia and Iran are in the way of creating a contiguous Turkified belt that will ultimately connect Turkey from the Adriatic Sea to the Great Wall of China.

2.2.2 On the Islamic Identity of Turkey

Similar to the transient nature of the Turkic culture in their current place of occupation, Islam too, was not an inborn ideology of the Turkic culture. Turkic tribes, first the Ghaznavian and the Karakhanids dismantled the previously Islamacized Persians who controlled Iran under the Samanides dynasty, just to be overthrown themselves by another invading Turkic tribe the Seljuks in 1038 AD. Like other Turkic tribes, the Seljuks had been converted to Islam during the westward migration from Central Asia into Iran and by 1055 AD Tugrul the grandson of Seljuk captured the seat of the Islamic Power under Abbasid Caliph Al Qaim, in Baghdad, after which the Caliph declared Tugrul as the first Sultan of the Islamic world. Prior to the arrival of Seljuk Turks in Iran in 1038 AD, four centuries earlier the Iranian Empire under the last king of the Sassanian Dynasty, Yazdgird III, with its capital in the Kermanshah region of Kurdistan (Mesopotamia), with Zoroastrian as their religion, had been defeated in the battle of Qadissiyyah at the order of the Caliph Omar ibn El-Khatab in 637, subsequently converting Iranians to Islam. With the Turkic defeat of the Persian-Samanian rule over Iran, and their capture of Baghdad in 1055 AD, the control of Iran, Kurdistan, Iraq and Syria fell in to the hands of the Seljuk Turks. This takeover of Baghdad, the center of Islamic Power, turned into a religious blessing for the Seljuk Turks to expand further west and conquer more land in the name of Islam. Following this, Alp Arsalan a Seljuk descendant began to invade Byzantine, the East Roman Christian territories in Anatolia and in 1071 AD, in the battle of Manzikirt defeated Emperor Romanos IV Diogenes. Expansion of the Seljuk Turks into the Anatolian heartland continued until 1299, when a new wave of Oghuz Turks arrived in Anatolia to further help the Seljuks to expand the Turkish Version of Islam in the Byzantine Empire. One of the new Turkic leaders was Osman I, whose descendent Sultan Mehmed II, conquered Constantinople in 1453, ending and changing the identity and the name of Anatolia from the Christian Byzantine Empire, to the Islamic Ottoman Empire. By the time Constantinople (present day Istanbul) was conquered, most of the East European Balkan states had fallen under the Ottoman Turks and become a part of their new empire which persisted until 1922 when it ended as the result of WWI. The word Ottoman Empire was named after Osman I, who was named after Uthman ibn Affan who ruled the Islamic world as the third Caliph after the death of Prophet Mohammad in 632 AD.

2.2.2.1 Two Cultures, two Versions of Islam

Under the Turkic tribes, the Seljuk Turks and starting in 1299 the Oghuz Turks and their predecessors the Ghazis (Islamic Warriors), completed the Turkification and Islamization of the Byzantine Empire. Islam became an offensive force by which Christians and non-Turk lands were conquered often with a vengeance. It is noteworthy to observe that another famous leader arose during this era. Toward the end of Seljuk rule in Anatolia, under the Kurdish Ayubid Dynasty, and particularly under the leadership of Saladin Ayubi, Islam took the path of a more defensive and conciliatory role during the time of the third Crusade (1189-1192). These are two versions of Islam under two different leadership with two different cultural heritage which could re-introduce Islam to the world today, especially the Western World, in two rather different lights: one a radical style of Islam that appears to be on the rise at present, and another style which should be re-introduced and encouraged: the peaceful, merciful Islam as personified by the character and nature of Saladin, for more info read Time Magazine’s Millennium issue article on Saladin, Man of the 11th Century.

2.2.2.2 Turkey’s use of Islam as a policy tool:

The Islamic world, particularly, the world of Sunni Islam, is well aware of the astonishing accomplishment of the Ottoman Turks during their six hundred years of rule in which they were able to expand, conquer, and Turkify, including taking their version of Islam into the heartland of the Christian West, from Armenia to the Balkans, and of their Islamization attempt of Europe. Recently even, they have also been setting up a grassroots movement in the United States, in Pennsylvania, under the plain clothes Imam Fethulla Gulen to Islamacize the Americas!. For this, Turkey wants to be recognized as the vanguard of Islam in the Arab and the Islamic world. Fortunately, no other countries in the Islamic world, except the most conservative of them all, namely Saudi Arabia and Qatar, have bought into this vainglorious talk by the “New” Turkey leadership and their promise of once more establishing a Neo-Ottoman Empire that will advance the cause of Sunni Islam abroad, especially in Europe (once they become an EU member), and in the United States through Imam Fethulla Gulen. The Neo-Ottoman/New-Turkey promise to the Sunni leaders of Islam is that they, Turkey, with the help of their NATO allies, (and Israel too), will forever eliminate the threat of the heretic Shiite courtiers such as Syria and Iran, or the anti fundamental Islamic countries in the region that are out of line with the Turko-Saudi traditional version of Islam. Deeply unfortunate and saddening, to a certain extent, the United States and some NATO countries have bought into this overthrow business of regime change as the idea is sold to them by the Turkish leadership, but unaware of the ultimate price the West will pay for going along with Turkey’s nationalistic plan. In essence, in order for Turkey to achieve its “big game” objective of Turkification from the “Great Wall of China to the Adriatic Sea” [3], and beyond, the force of Islam must be with them. The question is, can Turkey jump on the wave of mass uprising in the Islamic countries on one hand and be in collusion with the most conservative countries among them at the same time to secure their financial and political support without coming across as disingenuous at best, or Machiavellian at worst? The answer will be no, as sooner or later Turkey’s intricately woven policy of poly-politics is bound to unravel.

2.2.3 Turkey as a European Country:

Turkey’s European policy priority is to hold control over territories it has occupied since the fall of the Byzantine Empire starting in 1071 in the battle of Manzikert, and finalized in 1453 AD with the fall of Constantinople, and more recently in 1974 when the island of Cyprus was invaded and remains occupied to the consternation of Europe to this day. Turkey’s second priority is to be admitted as a member of the European Union. Toward this end, Turkey has started a policy of give and take in its accession negotiation with Europe which based on the final outcome of the “Zero Problem” policy of Turkey’s Foreign Minister, Mr. Davoutuglu, and the “deep state” strategic thinking by Turkey’s leadership. In the long run, it will bring more windfall profits to the Turkish nation after the accession process to the European Union is completed. On the surface, and since 1923 in line with the ideology of Kamal Ataturk, Turkey has tried to create a perception of a European-look-alike country. The Euro-Look-alike currency, dress code, an imitation democracy to lessen its human rights abuses, allowing a radio station to broadcast in minority languages mostly during the sleeping hours at night, and its membership in NATO are just a few examples under all of which lies the “deep-state” political agenda of Turkey which is to combine East-West and Islamic identities to serve the ultimate Turkish Nationalistic objectives.

2.2.3.1 Turkey, the Spearheading of the New Silk Road Project Connecting China to Europe:

As mentioned above, the history of population flow from East to West has been through waves of raids by Turkic tribal invasions well documented in the history books. The new wave of population flow from East to West, will be gradual and on the multilane highway of the New Silk Road, connecting Shanghai in China to Turkey and from there to the major capitals in Europe, constructed, managed, operated and controlled by the Shanghai Corporation Organization(wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai Corporation Organization).

With a Strategic partnership between China and Turkey announced in 2010 [5], Turkey is recognizing the growing economic power of China and wants to be both a stockroom for the Chinese goods into Europe as well as the bridge through which more than 150 million ethnic Turkic tribesmen and various other Chinese emigrants can march toward Europe in the course of the next fifty to a hundred years. This Strategic partnership between China and Turkey announced in 2010 [5], is what Mr. Davoutuglu is referring to in his Cooperation Council of Turkic Speaking States (CCTS) on August 23, 2012, in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan [4]. With Turkey’s accession to the European membership and permission for the free flow of economic goods as well as Turk-o-Chinese businessmen, merchants, visitors, and permanent residents, the survival of Europe and the Western civilization will be endangered as they are gradually forced to succumb to this last huge wave of people flowing out from the East with its ever exploding billion plus population.

This is the Turkish “deep state” policy also referred to as the Neo-Ottoman “Grand Scheme” or the “Big Game” policy to achieve the following objectives:

• To complete Turkification of Anatolia and cultural assimilation of the Kurdish culture.

• To defeat their historic rivals the Iranians, and by supporting the Turkifed Azeri ascendance to gain

• power in Iran.

• To regain their lost territories in the Middle East and re-access Europe,

• To use the conservative forces of Islam as a political support and to hijack the leadership of the Arab Spring movement to advance Turkey’s cause to enter the European Union as a stepping stone to advance Turkish Nationalism.

• To be China’s partner to receive and deliver consumer merchandise that will flow on the New Silk Road to enter Europe,

• To capture Europe in due time by the lurking policy of Turkey’s “deep state” policy disguised under that country’s “Zero Problem” policy as presented by the Neo-Ottomans and the “New Turkey” leadership.

Conclusions:

In the story of the Trojan Horse from Homer’s Odyssey, the long siege of Troy, (the location of which is now in present day Turkey), a wooden horse presented to the people of Troy in which was hidden a conquering army of their enemy. It is ironic that Turkey’s “Zero Problem” policy is the Trojan Horse of our modern day. For the people of the Middle East, waiting to be accepted by the people of Europe, hidden in the heart of it hundreds of millions of the “new” Turkic invaders will finally conquer the lost territories of the old Ottomans and the continent of Europe to permanently alter its essential culture and civilization. To prevent Europe experiencing a tragedy on the scale of a Trojan ploy and destruction at the hands of the Neo-Ottomans, each culture, country, region and continent must form a new alliance against the “deep state” policy of Turkey, and turn their “Zero Problem” policy into a “Zero Turkey” presence in the neighborhood. Individual Neo-Ottomans like Imam Fethulla Gulen and Mr. Ahmet Davutoglu who represent the Turkish leadership and their “deep state” policies must be recognized for what it represents and be discredited and dismantled. Thousands of years old Western heritage sites located within the 90 year old modern country of Turkey (which are heralded by the Turkish government as “Turkish” with overly displayed and ubiquitous Turkish flag) must be acknowledged to their culture of origin, and cultural ownership returned back to their rightful owners. The region is rich in Greek, Roman, Mesopotamian, Kurdish, Armenian and Biblical history of Ionia, Thessalonia, Hittites, etc. The Kurds and the Armenian resistance movements are in part driven by their desire for cultural survival against a long-standing Turkification strategy. By supporting their movement and defense of their cultural and human rights, the inflow of a new wave of population from the East into the West, can be halted. The slowing and reversal of this Turkification process (de-Turkification of the Turkified lands and cultures) can only be accomplished through recognizing its existence and its ulterior motives. This will be most effectively countered by putting in place a revived self-determination policy in which the Western world and the United Nations can support transformation of the Middle East to a genuine Democracy. A transformation through ballots rather than bullets will hopefully result not only in regime change, but also in border change for cultural unification of divided peoples and their homelands. The Western world owes this to the peoples of Greece, the Aegean Sea, Thrace and the Balkans, and to the most violence-stricken and marginalized among them, the peoples of the Middle East, whose founding cultures have contributed to the ideals of freedom and civilization that is the foundation upon which the cultural identity and heritage of our Western Civilization was built. “Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it”.

Notes:

1. “Model Citizens of the State” The Jews of Turkey, by Rifat N. Bali from Zoryan Institute.

2. Turkey and Eurasia: frontiers of a new geographic imagination. Bulent Aras and Hakan Fidan